Reval maker Wulf

[Ubaranda]

Hi all!
What do you think, is this Reval maker Johann Wilhelm Friedrich Wulf (Фёдор Вульф) from St.Petersburg?
A.N.Ivanov write that Wulf began working in 1805, then in 1863 he was a very-very old man...
Thanks in advance.

[Qrt.S]

No, it is not that Wulf, it is another person. It is Georg Wilhelm Wulff 1838-1882 in Tallinn. He also marked GW or G.W The assayer is Jakov Natarov also in Tallinn 1853-1869. That is the man. Mind my saying but you made a hasty conclusion. Don't you see the difference between the marks?

[Ubaranda]

Hi Qrt.S!
Many thanks for your reply! Of course, I saw the difference between the marks, but I had no information about Wulff, except Ivanov. Many makers have used different versions of marks ...

[Qrt.S]

Hello Ubaranda,

Please keep in mind not to trust 100% on Ivanov unless there is a picture of the mark and not even then.... Ivanov's biggest problem is that if he doesn't know what mark/punch a master has used, he takes for granted that it is the master's initals e.g. "Valdimir Ivanov" = IV. That assumption cannot be made! . Another problem is that there is not a single unknown master or mark mentioned i Ivanov's blue volumes. In additon, only masters in Moscow and St Petersburg are listed no others.

[Qrt.S]

Ähhh, a typo. "Valdimir Ivanov = ВИ (VI).

And yes, masters used different punches, which makes it difficult sometimes. In such a case you must fall back to other indications, like working periods, assayer and/or town. In Russian Estonia it is particularly difficult because the assayer was located in Reval/Tallinn or Tartu/Dorpat (In Latvia/Courland in Riga and Jelgava) but some master were domiciled elsewhere. Therefore there can be mismatches between the assayer's location and master's location (the town mark). Still it is a correct marking....in most cases :-)))

[Zolotnik]

Hi -

here are the correct marks of Wulff:



source: A. Leistikow, Baltisches Silber

In his books Ivanov often uses marks taken from fakes. So watch out!

Regards
Zolotnik

[Qrt.S]

It is correct as Zolotnik states and in addition, Wulff also marked WULF with only one F as in this case. He also marked G.W with a dot as well as without it (GW). Leistikow doesn't show all punches. One should also be careful not to mix the GW mark without a dot with Gustav Weiss who also marked GW and no dot. He was active a bit earlier but still...